Matcollis This Movie Can Only Be Described With One Word.

TaryBiggBall It was OK. I don't see why everyone loves it so much. It wasn't very smart or deep or well-directed.

ChampDavSlim The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

martin-secker Okay, this isn't going to win any awards. However, it's not a bad piece of popcorn entertainment as long as you can ignore some glaring continuity errors and clunky dialogue. The lead performances are unusually strong Bryan Brown plays it just right, MacFadyen does a great scumbag impression while Weller adds gravitas to an unoriginal character. I hadn't seen Weller in anything for a few years and he looks very good for his age, the verbal sparring between Brown and himself are one of the highlights. In many ways, it reminded me of the John Flynn movies of the Eighties full of tough-talking, testosterone blokes, good action and risible dialogue.

TimeForLime GUN-SLINGING TEAM ROBBERIES BUT NOTHING NEW. JUST AVERAGE. STYX is a `B' movie. There is nothing wrong with `B' movies. They are meant to entertain. Some are made just for TV or cable. Now, some are made for Direct-to-DVD. Many of our favorite actors make a lot of `B' movies in addition to top films: Peter Weller, Dennis Hopper, and Faye Dunaway are examples. I think the reasonableness of evaluating them too carefully is made by Leonard Maltin who confines himself to BELOW-AVERAGE AVERAGE or ABOVE-AVERAGE.STYX for me rates an AVERAGE. The characters and their skills are established by a bank heist in the opening moments. Well-planned, but poorly executed because one of the robbers has poor character. (I can't give too much detail.)The main portion of the film spans preparation for a second robbery. The gang is larger because more talents are required. More motives for the robbery, too, some of which are elaborated in great detail. The issue of personal character arises again. There is the mandatory assembly of specialists, acquisition of equipment. Missing is a dry run or practice exercise, often part of these stories.Then the big heist. Its degree of success depends on every team member meeting or exceeding their assignment. But don't these groups always have a `spoiler' who fouls things up? Or is it the type of story where the spoiler surprises everyone and outdoes himself?There is nothing new here. Most of what we see isn't scripted, acted, or filmed particularly well. But it's a pleasure to see Bryan Brown (F/X 1986) and Peter Weller (ROBOCOP 1987) in the same film, on the same side. The tensions between them are a notch above the balance of the production.

LHMovieBuff I admit I started from a false assumption with this film, I thought the story had promise and the leads, especially Weller and Brown would make it enjoyable. Wrong! Every element of the films production comes off as being second rate. Weller and Brown, who are not done any favors by their choice of material, struggle at first, before giving in to complete disinterest. The plot is basic, crims double cross one another for diamonds. This film seems to be double crossing just to fill the ninety or so minutes.The twists and turns are nothing new, predictability renders them a complete yawn. Save your money and put this one back on the shelf.

PowerSheep This is the worst film I have ever had the misfortune to sit through. Painful as it was I managed to get to the end, but many of the people I watched it with didn't. I am surprised at this films high rating, I gave it no more than 1!